Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce

joecrisp · 03-04-2005, 08:18 AM

Shane makes some excellent points. Gibbs is showing he has a much better understanding of the salary cap this offseason, and he is protecting the team's long-term interests in regard to the salary cap projections for the next 3 years or so.

Apparently, the Skins' offer to Pierce was very close to what the Giants offered him, with the primary difference being that the Redskins' offer contained smaller salary numbers over the first two years of the contract. Obviously, those first two years are critical, in that the Skins need cap room for this offseason to sign other players and possibly move Coles, while also needing to minimize the cap impact in 2006, which is slated to be a harsh cap year for the Skins.

The Giants had the edge in that they were willing to give Pierce just enough money in the first two years to make it hard for the Skins to match. Gibbs made the tough decision, but it was the right decision. Pierce will be missed, but not so much that it would have been worth exacerbating the team's tenuous salary cap situation over the next two years to keep him.

The same principle holds true for Smoot, and any other player that wants more money than the team can reasonably afford to pay within the parameters of their salary cap projections.

Give Gibbs some credit for finally bringing some sensibility to this team's free agency strategy.

FRPLG · 03-04-2005, 08:20 AM

There are few people who would say Lucas is a better corner than Smoot and even fewer who would say Henry is. Both guy git big deals. The Skins offering $10,000,000 as a SB is UNDERPAYING him based on the market. Guess what guys...everything is driven by the market. It seems silly to me to say we should go with less talent just so we can stand on principle or something. What freaking principle? The principle that we think we know how much a CB should cost and we won't pay enough to keep a quality one? That seems remarkably arrogant and doomed to failure. Corner is the highest paid position in the league for a reason. It is the HARDEST position to play and the difference between a good CB and an average CB is tremendous for a defense. We are going to lose a guy simply because we are being hard headed about what we offer him. There IS A WAY to get this done that is suitable for everyone. If there wasn't then the rhetoric from Redskins park would be more to the effect that they just can't afford the guy much like they did with Pierce. They decided he wasn't worth the money the Giants we're going to pay him. If the Skins don't think Smoot is worth what he is seeking then they need to look no further than the recent CB deals to show them they are wrong. Unless of course they think Lucas and Henry are better CBs. In that case then it is reasonable to pay Smoot less in their mind. Otherwise up the ante or get of the game for Smoot. Additinally I haven't seen anywhere that teams are passing Smoot up. He just started taking visits yesterday and both Dallas and Carolina were so in need of a CB that they jumped in early to avoid missing the boat on CBs and over paying even more once a huge market is set. Time to wise up at Redskins park and make a decision whether they really are going to try and resign quality players before our team is a shell next year.

Schneed10 · 03-04-2005, 08:26 AM

Shane, brilliant post. I'm not going to quote it because it was long as hell, but it was well worth reading. Promoting players from within does several things:

1) As Shane said, motivates players to play hard in hopes of one day becoming a starter and earning more cash.

2) Motivates players by providing them the feeling that when they do get promoted, they've earned the respect of the coaching staff and they're teammates.

3) Fosters trust between the players and the coaching staff. They know that if they play hard, they'll be given a fair shot.

4) And when you pay free agents a ton of money, and you don't give your own guys a chance to earn their keep, you create a divide in the locker room. The guys who have paid their dues as Redskins will get jealous of the guys who just came in and got big money.

And after Gregg Williams hit on all of his personnel moves last year, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. If he thinks Marshall can start and play well, then I believe him.

And besides, Williams turned straw into gold last year on defense. I say let him try to do it again, and spend the money upgrading the offense.

FRPLG · 03-04-2005, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joecrisp

Give Gibbs some credit for finally bringing some sensibility to this team's free agency strategy.

This team was built to win now! But basically we're going into rebuild mode by letting the quality players leave. We are going to have LESS TALENT next year returning from a team that was 6-10! Does this sound like a good plan? It is not unless we admit they're simply going to start to jetison anyone who cost any money. This is so frustrating. We had two guys who WERE ANCHORS on our defense which basically won us 6 games last year. We have lost one because we decided we couldn't afford him and now we'll lose another because we are too stubborn to simply pay him what he is worth.

FRPLG · 03-04-2005, 08:32 AM

I agree with Shane in terms of signing Free Agents but when it comes to your own players it seems like it might also be motivational for players to know that their team values them and wants to reward them with a fair market deal rather than low balling them hoping they'll take the financial hit just to stay in the same place. Doing otherwise simply fosters dicontinuity since every player plays his 3 or 4 year contract and then leaves for greener pastures when the Skins low ball 'em. Our fundamental personnel issue has been that we sign too many outside free agents while never teaching and promoting from within. Finally we have a chance to turn that course and we go in a totally wrong direction. I hope I am wrong and we can find quality guys to replace Smoot and Pierce but it is a big gamble to simply assume we can when we know they were quality players for us.

joecrisp · 03-04-2005, 08:34 AM

There's some sentiment around the league that the cornerback market is overvalued now, due to the impact of the new rules enforcements that were effected last season, which have essentially made "shut-down" corners a thing of the past. The current market value has been inflated by contracts signed by upper-echelon cornerbacks over the past 3 or 4 years, when players such as Ty Law and Champ Bailey-- corners who truly fit the rare "shut-down" label when it was applicable-- signed huge contracts with enormous signing bonuses. While talented cornerbacks are certainly still a valuable commodity, there is a feeling they are no longer as valuable as the "fair market value" would suggest.

Given the way Bailey was burned repeatedly last season, perhaps there is some credence to that theory.

That Guy · 03-04-2005, 08:41 AM

i saw 3-4 broncos games last year, and champ looked awful in all of them... his tackle count is high cause he lets his receivers catch the ball i guess... every game i saw him fall down on his face. Anyways, I still think we should get smoot signed or look into rolle, but caving 1-3mill on a 6 year deal wouldn't be horrible since this is a really crappy free agency in terms of overall talent available. He hasn't been better than springs, but he's younger and this IS a bad year to be a buyer of talent.

Monksdown · 03-04-2005, 10:03 AM

Our biggest fault over the last half decade has been our unbridled spending sprees in the offseasons. While it is exciting for fans like us to see the big names sport the burgundy and gold, I am confident in our team president, and coach.

People pretend that Joe Gibbs has no experience dealing with limits on cash flow. This year, Joe Gibbs racing increased size 50% to add another driver in NASCAR. He has built that team from scratch, initially with his own money, and now with his sponsers money. Needless to say, Joe understands the sliding value of money.

And even more importantly, Joe understands talent. We have a very confident, and calm leadership on this team now, and I am content with the change between last offseason, and this one.

It is very common in all sports to look to the top for guidance. So we find ourselves looking at the New England Patriots, who have been making difficult decisions for 5 years now. The same 5 years that we have been overpaying for talent, the patriots have been cutting talent.

My point is, in building a football program, it's not only about risks, its about caution and patience as well. Hail to the Redskins.

MTK · 03-04-2005, 10:28 AM

I really like the idea of promoting from within rather than seeking out big named and high priced free agents.

Gibbs definitely has his eye down the road cap wise, and since Marshall filled in very well last year it's a wise decision to give him a crack at starting in the middle. Gotta love his cap # too.

He's a little light at 228, but he could probably add 10 pounds before next season without losing much speed or quickness.

Schneed10 · 03-04-2005, 10:34 AM

It makes no sense to overpay for a CB just because everyone else in the league is overpaying for free agent CBs. Ken Lucas gets $13 million, Anthony Henry gets $10 million, so therefore that means we SHOULD pay Smoot $14 million?

While I agree that Smoot is better than Lucas or Henry, that doesn't mean you necessarily pay up to get him. It's true that the market drives prices, and because of Lucas and Henry, I'm sure Smoot will command $14 million. By paying the market price for Smoot we would be acknowledging that we think the market is fairly valued for free agent CBs.

Do you really think that's the case? Every columnist talks about how teams have more cap room this year than ever before, and the free agent talent is so much thinner than ever before. If the supply of cap dollars is up, and the supply of free agent talent is down, then the price if those free agents skyrockets as teams figure "well, we've got all this cap room, might as well use it."

Problem is we don't have tons of cap room. And even if we did, paying the market rate for a free agent CB doesn't make it a smart way to spend cap dollars.

What would you rather have, Walt Harris at $1.5 million against the cap, or Smoot at $4.5 million against the cap? I'd take Harris. I don't think Smoot is 3 times better than Harris.

Redskins_P · 03-04-2005, 10:59 AM

I think Marshall will do just fine at MLB. He already knows the system, and last year he proved that he can play at a high level.

cpayne5 · 03-04-2005, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I really like the idea of promoting from within rather than seeking out big named and high priced free agents.

Gibbs definitely has his eye down the road cap wise, and since Marshall filled in very well last year it's a wise decision to give him a crack at starting in the middle. Gotta love his cap # too.

He's a little light at 228, but he could probably add 10 pounds before next season without losing much speed or quickness.

Yeah, AP bulked up quite a bit to play MLB last year. He was about the size of Marshall in past years.

dirtbag2112 · 03-04-2005, 11:26 AM

Let the young guys step up and play. The only way they'll get good is by being on the field.

Skinsfanforlife · 03-04-2005, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monksdown

Our biggest fault over the last half decade has been our unbridled spending sprees in the offseasons. While it is exciting for fans like us to see the big names sport the burgundy and gold, I am confident in our team president, and coach.

People pretend that Joe Gibbs has no experience dealing with limits on cash flow. This year, Joe Gibbs racing increased size 50% to add another driver in NASCAR. He has built that team from scratch, initially with his own money, and now with his sponsers money. Needless to say, Joe understands the sliding value of money.

And even more importantly, Joe understands talent. We have a very confident, and calm leadership on this team now, and I am content with the change between last offseason, and this one.

It is very common in all sports to look to the top for guidance. So we find ourselves looking at the New England Patriots, who have been making difficult decisions for 5 years now. The same 5 years that we have been overpaying for talent, the patriots have been cutting talent.

My point is, in building a football program, it's not only about risks, its about caution and patience as well. Hail to the Redskins.

Well put..........I agree

diehardskin2982 · 03-04-2005, 01:02 PM

we'll sign someone, trust in gibbs. The report is from the times who, they're not known for great quality reporting.

03-04-2005, 08:18 AM	#16
joecrisp The Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Charlottesville, VA Age: 48 Posts: 1,501	Re: Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce Shane makes some excellent points. Gibbs is showing he has a much better understanding of the salary cap this offseason, and he is protecting the team's long-term interests in regard to the salary cap projections for the next 3 years or so. Apparently, the Skins' offer to Pierce was very close to what the Giants offered him, with the primary difference being that the Redskins' offer contained smaller salary numbers over the first two years of the contract. Obviously, those first two years are critical, in that the Skins need cap room for this offseason to sign other players and possibly move Coles, while also needing to minimize the cap impact in 2006, which is slated to be a harsh cap year for the Skins. The Giants had the edge in that they were willing to give Pierce just enough money in the first two years to make it hard for the Skins to match. Gibbs made the tough decision, but it was the right decision. Pierce will be missed, but not so much that it would have been worth exacerbating the team's tenuous salary cap situation over the next two years to keep him. The same principle holds true for Smoot, and any other player that wants more money than the team can reasonably afford to pay within the parameters of their salary cap projections. Give Gibbs some credit for finally bringing some sensibility to this team's free agency strategy.

03-04-2005, 08:20 AM	#17
FRPLG MVP Join Date: May 2004 Age: 45 Posts: 10,164	Re: Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce There are few people who would say Lucas is a better corner than Smoot and even fewer who would say Henry is. Both guy git big deals. The Skins offering $10,000,000 as a SB is UNDERPAYING him based on the market. Guess what guys...everything is driven by the market. It seems silly to me to say we should go with less talent just so we can stand on principle or something. What freaking principle? The principle that we think we know how much a CB should cost and we won't pay enough to keep a quality one? That seems remarkably arrogant and doomed to failure. Corner is the highest paid position in the league for a reason. It is the HARDEST position to play and the difference between a good CB and an average CB is tremendous for a defense. We are going to lose a guy simply because we are being hard headed about what we offer him. There IS A WAY to get this done that is suitable for everyone. If there wasn't then the rhetoric from Redskins park would be more to the effect that they just can't afford the guy much like they did with Pierce. They decided he wasn't worth the money the Giants we're going to pay him. If the Skins don't think Smoot is worth what he is seeking then they need to look no further than the recent CB deals to show them they are wrong. Unless of course they think Lucas and Henry are better CBs. In that case then it is reasonable to pay Smoot less in their mind. Otherwise up the ante or get of the game for Smoot. Additinally I haven't seen anywhere that teams are passing Smoot up. He just started taking visits yesterday and both Dallas and Carolina were so in need of a CB that they jumped in early to avoid missing the boat on CBs and over paying even more once a huge market is set. Time to wise up at Redskins park and make a decision whether they really are going to try and resign quality players before our team is a shell next year.

03-04-2005, 08:26 AM	#18
Schneed10 A Dude Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Newtown Square, PA Age: 44 Posts: 12,416	Re: Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce Shane, brilliant post. I'm not going to quote it because it was long as hell, but it was well worth reading. Promoting players from within does several things: 1) As Shane said, motivates players to play hard in hopes of one day becoming a starter and earning more cash. 2) Motivates players by providing them the feeling that when they do get promoted, they've earned the respect of the coaching staff and they're teammates. 3) Fosters trust between the players and the coaching staff. They know that if they play hard, they'll be given a fair shot. 4) And when you pay free agents a ton of money, and you don't give your own guys a chance to earn their keep, you create a divide in the locker room. The guys who have paid their dues as Redskins will get jealous of the guys who just came in and got big money. And after Gregg Williams hit on all of his personnel moves last year, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. If he thinks Marshall can start and play well, then I believe him. And besides, Williams turned straw into gold last year on defense. I say let him try to do it again, and spend the money upgrading the offense.

03-04-2005, 08:32 AM	#20
FRPLG MVP Join Date: May 2004 Age: 45 Posts: 10,164	Re: Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce I agree with Shane in terms of signing Free Agents but when it comes to your own players it seems like it might also be motivational for players to know that their team values them and wants to reward them with a fair market deal rather than low balling them hoping they'll take the financial hit just to stay in the same place. Doing otherwise simply fosters dicontinuity since every player plays his 3 or 4 year contract and then leaves for greener pastures when the Skins low ball 'em. Our fundamental personnel issue has been that we sign too many outside free agents while never teaching and promoting from within. Finally we have a chance to turn that course and we go in a totally wrong direction. I hope I am wrong and we can find quality guys to replace Smoot and Pierce but it is a big gamble to simply assume we can when we know they were quality players for us.

03-04-2005, 08:34 AM	#21
joecrisp The Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Charlottesville, VA Age: 48 Posts: 1,501	Re: Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce There's some sentiment around the league that the cornerback market is overvalued now, due to the impact of the new rules enforcements that were effected last season, which have essentially made "shut-down" corners a thing of the past. The current market value has been inflated by contracts signed by upper-echelon cornerbacks over the past 3 or 4 years, when players such as Ty Law and Champ Bailey-- corners who truly fit the rare "shut-down" label when it was applicable-- signed huge contracts with enormous signing bonuses. While talented cornerbacks are certainly still a valuable commodity, there is a feeling they are no longer as valuable as the "fair market value" would suggest. Given the way Bailey was burned repeatedly last season, perhaps there is some credence to that theory.

03-04-2005, 08:41 AM	#22
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 41 Posts: 17,483	Re: Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce i saw 3-4 broncos games last year, and champ looked awful in all of them... his tackle count is high cause he lets his receivers catch the ball i guess... every game i saw him fall down on his face. Anyways, I still think we should get smoot signed or look into rolle, but caving 1-3mill on a 6 year deal wouldn't be horrible since this is a really crappy free agency in terms of overall talent available. He hasn't been better than springs, but he's younger and this IS a bad year to be a buyer of talent.

03-04-2005, 10:03 AM	#23
Monksdown The Starter Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Warrenton, Virginia Age: 43 Posts: 1,515	A Calm, Reassuring Offseason Our biggest fault over the last half decade has been our unbridled spending sprees in the offseasons. While it is exciting for fans like us to see the big names sport the burgundy and gold, I am confident in our team president, and coach. People pretend that Joe Gibbs has no experience dealing with limits on cash flow. This year, Joe Gibbs racing increased size 50% to add another driver in NASCAR. He has built that team from scratch, initially with his own money, and now with his sponsers money. Needless to say, Joe understands the sliding value of money. And even more importantly, Joe understands talent. We have a very confident, and calm leadership on this team now, and I am content with the change between last offseason, and this one. It is very common in all sports to look to the top for guidance. So we find ourselves looking at the New England Patriots, who have been making difficult decisions for 5 years now. The same 5 years that we have been overpaying for talent, the patriots have been cutting talent. My point is, in building a football program, it's not only about risks, its about caution and patience as well. Hail to the Redskins.

03-04-2005, 10:28 AM	#24
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 51 Posts: 99,336	Re: Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce I really like the idea of promoting from within rather than seeking out big named and high priced free agents. Gibbs definitely has his eye down the road cap wise, and since Marshall filled in very well last year it's a wise decision to give him a crack at starting in the middle. Gotta love his cap # too. He's a little light at 228, but he could probably add 10 pounds before next season without losing much speed or quickness. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

03-04-2005, 10:34 AM	#25
Schneed10 A Dude Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Newtown Square, PA Age: 44 Posts: 12,416	Re: Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce It makes no sense to overpay for a CB just because everyone else in the league is overpaying for free agent CBs. Ken Lucas gets $13 million, Anthony Henry gets $10 million, so therefore that means we SHOULD pay Smoot $14 million? While I agree that Smoot is better than Lucas or Henry, that doesn't mean you necessarily pay up to get him. It's true that the market drives prices, and because of Lucas and Henry, I'm sure Smoot will command $14 million. By paying the market price for Smoot we would be acknowledging that we think the market is fairly valued for free agent CBs. Do you really think that's the case? Every columnist talks about how teams have more cap room this year than ever before, and the free agent talent is so much thinner than ever before. If the supply of cap dollars is up, and the supply of free agent talent is down, then the price if those free agents skyrockets as teams figure "well, we've got all this cap room, might as well use it." Problem is we don't have tons of cap room. And even if we did, paying the market rate for a free agent CB doesn't make it a smart way to spend cap dollars. What would you rather have, Walt Harris at $1.5 million against the cap, or Smoot at $4.5 million against the cap? I'd take Harris. I don't think Smoot is 3 times better than Harris.

03-04-2005, 10:59 AM	#26
Redskins_P Fight for old DC! Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Aldie, VA Age: 45 Posts: 4,101	Re: Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce I think Marshall will do just fine at MLB. He already knows the system, and last year he proved that he can play at a high level.

03-04-2005, 11:26 AM	#28
dirtbag2112 Special Teams Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 293	Re: Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce Let the young guys step up and play. The only way they'll get good is by being on the field.

03-04-2005, 01:02 PM	#30
diehardskin2982 Another Year, another mess. Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,581	Re: Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce we'll sign someone, trust in gibbs. The report is from the times who, they're not known for great quality reporting. __________________ That got ugly fast

Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce

Locker Room Main Forum